Meaning: This quote by Samuel Johnson is a satirical commentary on the influence of financial gain on the clarity and truthfulness of doctrines and beliefs. Johnson, an influential English writer, critic, and lexicographer of the 18th century, was known for his wit and insight into the human condition. In this quote, he suggests that the clarity and truthfulness of doctrines and beliefs are often influenced by financial incentives rather than genuine conviction or evidence.

The quote is structured in a way that highlights the idea of financial gain as a determining factor in the clarity and truthfulness of doctrines. Johnson starts with the line "What makes all doctrines plain and clear? About two hundred pounds a year," implying that financial gain can simplify and clarify even the most complex doctrines or beliefs. This satirical statement highlights the idea that individuals or institutions may be motivated to present their doctrines or beliefs in a favorable light in order to secure financial support or patronage.

Johnson follows this with the line "And that which was proved true before, prove false again? Two hundred more," suggesting that the same financial incentive can lead to a reversal of previously held beliefs or truths. This line underscores the notion that financial gain can lead to the manipulation or distortion of truths, as individuals or organizations may be swayed to alter their positions or principles in exchange for further financial rewards.

The quote as a whole serves as a commentary on the vulnerability of doctrines and beliefs to the influence of money. It suggests that the pursuit of financial gain can compromise the integrity and sincerity of doctrines, leading to a situation where clarity and truthfulness are contingent upon monetary incentives rather than genuine conviction or evidence.

In the context of Johnson's era, this quote can be seen as a critique of the role of patronage and sponsorship in shaping intellectual and ideological discourse. During the 18th century, many writers, scholars, and artists relied on the support of wealthy patrons to sustain their work, leading to a potential conflict of interest where their creative or intellectual output could be influenced by the desires and agendas of their benefactors.

Furthermore, the quote can also be interpreted in a broader societal context, highlighting the pervasive influence of money and financial incentives on the shaping of beliefs and ideologies. This idea remains relevant in contemporary society, where commercial interests, corporate sponsorship, and financial backing can impact the presentation and reception of various doctrines and beliefs.

In conclusion, Samuel Johnson's quote serves as a thought-provoking commentary on the complex interplay between financial incentives and the clarity and truthfulness of doctrines and beliefs. It sheds light on the potential for monetary interests to sway, manipulate, or distort truths, and invites reflection on the integrity and authenticity of convictions in the face of financial gain.